The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
11-6127•United States of America v. Jabbaar Fareed
11-6127Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJul 22, 2011
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6127
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JABBAAR FAREED,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
Chief District Judge. (1:07-cr-00130-JAB-1)
Submitted: June 30, 2011 Decided: July 22, 2011
Before MOTZ and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jabbaar Fareed, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Michael Hamilton,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Jabbaar Fareed appeals the district court’s order
granting him a reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) (2006). Finding no merit in Fareed’s appeal, we
affirm.
First, the record does not demonstrate that Fareed
raised the issue his seeks to appeal before the district court.
Such issues generally are not amenable to appellate
consideration. Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir.
1993). Second, Fareed’s basis for further reduction of sentence
could not properly be pursued through a motion brought under 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Lastly, the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010
does not apply retroactively to offenders, like Fareed, who were
sentenced before its enactment. United States v. Bullard,
F.3d , No. 09-5214, 2011 WL 1718894, at *10 (4th Cir. May 6,
2011). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.